Disgraced Pathologist Apologizes For “Mistakes”

“Dr. Smith sincerely regrets these mistakes and apologizes to all who may have been affected by his errors.”

That’s a small statement for errors that have had a large impact on the lives of a great number of people across Ontario. The mea culpa came from Dr. Charles Smith, a forensic pathologist who worked for the Hospital for Sick Children and was considered a well respected and credible expert on forensic evidence. Or at least that’s what the Crown Attorney and jury members believed after Smith testified in hundreds of cases during his two decade tenure.

But in dozens of them, the evidence hasn’t held up, even though many parents, uncles and aunts he helped convict wound up spending years in jail or under suspicion.

“Dr. Smith wishes to publicly acknowledge that in the 20 years that he performed autopsies, he made a number of mistakes for which he is truly sorry,” explains lawyer Niels Ortved. The apology came on the first day of an inquiry into the doctor’s actions.

Smith wasn’t at the hearing on day one, but some of his alleged victims were. Brenda Waudby listened stonefaced to the apology as she walked out of the hearing. She lived under a cloud for years, after Smith’s evidence showed she’d allegedly killed her 21-month-old daughter. Years later, a babysitter confessed to the crime, finally clearing her.

But it was too late for the distraught mother who not only lost her child but her reputation. She didn’t comment on Smith’s statement but her face spoke volumes.

Many who were most affected by the expert’s conclusions weren’t there, including William Mullins-Johnson, who was recently found not guilty in the death of his four-year-old niece after serving 12 years behind bars. Oshawa couple Marco and Anisa Trotta were also absent. They were granted a new trial last week in the 1993 death of their eight-month-old son after Smith’s evidence pointed the finger of guilt at them.

“The apology is a nice initial first step,” concedes lawyer Michael Lomer. “There’s a huge amount of harm that’s been done, and I think that, you know, we’re all getting some sense of it, because every mistake … blows apart families.”

Many who weren’t there on Monday will have another chance to hear from the doctor himself when he testifies in January. But they may never feel justice has been done. The hearings, which will last about three months and be followed by a report in April, won’t be looking to assign blame.

Instead, they will address the failure of the system and how it can be improved, an idea that will help future accused – but not those who’ve already lost a large part of their lives.

Some of the questionable cases

---

Full text of the written statement by Dr. Charles Smith read by his lawyer Niels Ortved at the opening of an inquiry into pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario:

“As this inquiry commences and before any testimony is heard, Dr. Smith wishes to publicly acknowledge to the commission that in the 20 years that he performed autopsies at the direction of the Office of the Chief Coroner of Ontario, he made a number of mistakes for which he is truly sorry.”

“Dr. Smith sincerely regrets these mistakes and apologizes to all who may have been affected by his errors. Dr. Smith wishes to emphasize that any such mistakes were made honestly and without any intention to harm or obstruct the pediatric death investigations in which he was involved.”

“At all times, Dr. Smith endeavoured to use whatever knowledge and expertise he possessed to render accurate pathologic opinions. In retrospect, he understands that in some 20 cases which form the basis of this inquiry, his work, while to the best of his ability at the time, was simply not good enough in certain circumstances.”